Yes, there is a mutlitude of factors that differentiate the lute idiom from
the guitar one.
The main element is overtone palette that permits the lute to accomplish
more with less:
fewer notes produce more content. Low string tension and light construction
preclude
all guitar effects.
Double strings determine differences of getting from one note to the next,
as well physical microeffort required for that, and that in turn determine
the much different "negative space" of the lute music. You pluck the lute
pretty much one single way, unlike guitar.
And the baroque tuning yields considerable differences of harmonic and
melodic behavior.
RT
----- Original Message -----
From: "Stephen Kenyon" <[email protected]>
Cc: "Lute Net" <[email protected]>
Sent: Tuesday, March 29, 2011 7:07 AM
Subject: [LUTE] Re: a modern lute duet by Gilbert Isbin
This reminds me of a question raised when I wrote a piece supposedly for
lute (6 course) ages ago. I showed it to a lutenist who said it was
really guitar music. Well, I'd written it using a guitar (tuned
appropriately of course) having no lute to use. But it seems to me that
its more a question of the musical style, my piece being a sort of
quasi-classical sonata type of thing.
So what would the general understanding be, how non-traditional musical
style/content affects whether a piece would be considered lute-like? Are
there really, subtle aspects of how the instrument works, differently from
guitar that would trump these...in which case how would a non-lutenist
ever write for lute?
(Aside - I've just had a major piece written for guitar by a non-player,
some of which is a little challenging and pushes the boundaries...which is
rather the point to a degree?)
Stephen
Stuart Walsh wrote:
Gilbert Isbin has written some lute duets, "3 contemporary lute duets"
published by the Lute Society, 2009. Here is a go at one of them: 'And
Autumn Came'.
To get on or off this list see list information at
http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html
